Review: Fujifilm X-T10

Image Quality

It’s now been almost three and a half years since the X-Pro 1 was launched, and when it did, the 16 Megapixel X-Trans sensor was remarkable for an APS-C sensor.  It’s still a very good sensor, but without an update in well over 3 years, it’s also getting long in the tooth. There’s not a ton to talk about with regards to the X-T10’s image quality, at least not in-depth.  It’s the same sensor used in the X-T1.  The same sensor used in the X-E2, and aside from phase detect autofocus points, it’s the same sensor that was used in the original X-Pro1.  As such, if you’ve used one Fuji X-Series camera, you’ve used them all with regards to image quality.

Due to the same sensor and overall image quality, some portions of this section have been borrowed from previous X-Series reviews.

Color and Dynamic Range

While the X-T10’s sensor is nothing new, it still definitely holds its own with regards to color response and dynamic range.  Both are still excellent, even when comparing them to cameras with newer APS-C sensors.  The 16 megapixel sensor in the Fuji X-T10 has a very wide dynamic range, allowing you to capture plenty of detail in the highlights and shadows even in high contrast situations.  It’s rare that a situation arises that will truly exceed the dynamic range of the sensor.

Boulder Glen - Fujifilm X-T10 with Fujinon XF 10-24mm f/4 @ 14mm, f/10, 3.7s
Boulder Glen – Fujifilm X-T10 with Fujinon XF 10-24mm f/4 @ 14mm, f/10, 3.7s

Likewise, Fuji has always excelled at color, with accurate white balance and excellent color response.  RAW files tend to be muted upon import, but take adjustment extremely well.  JPEG files have among the best color of any JPEG engine in the business. As of this review, the only major RAW conversion program (for Windows, which is what I use) that works with the X-T10’s files is Adobe Lightroom and ACR.  Phase One hasn’t added support to Capture One Pro 8, and there is something different about the RAW encoding with the X-T10 files, since Photo Ninja couldn’t open them either.  Lightroom 6 does a good job with color on the Fuji files, however, with support for the film simulations built into the program, making it easier to match the color response from the JPEG files.  Adobe has recently improved the color rendering of Fuji files, preventing some color artifacts at certain transition points.

Unfortunately, Adobe still is subject to interpreting the X-T10’s files with a watercolor look in certain situations.  There is word that Adobe is working directly with Fuji to eliminate this artifact, which would be nice.  When Photo Ninja gets support for the X-T10, it’s a great converter for X-Trans conversions, as the watercolor effect is essentially absent with that converter.

Noise and Detail

The X-T10 has very good noise control, with JPEG images showing very low noise up to ISO 3200 and even somewhat usable images up to ISO 25,600.  The X-T10 includes support for ISO 51,200, but in my opinion: don’t bother.  ISO 51,200 is frankly just a checkmark on the spec sheet, as it’s definitely a step too far..  Files at that ISO show visible banding and blotchy noise throughout.  It’s also worth noting that Fuji still separates the expanded ISOs from the regular ISOs by making anything outside ISO 200-6400 JPEG only.  I’m not sure why they simply can’t enable RAW support for these ISOs.  Sure, you can achieve what the camera would be doing by underexposing at ISO 6400 and bringing the exposure up in your RAW converter, but I really shouldn’t have to make that adjustment just to keep shooting in RAW.  They are the only maker that does that in 2015.

RAW files show a little more noise than the JPEGs but also much more detail.  Noise remains quite low up to ISO 1600 and very usable at ISO 3200 and 6400.  I rarely worry about the ISO I’m shooting with any of these cameras, as quality shots can be had at any of the native ISOs.  It is worth noting that like all the X-Trans cameras, the X-T10 does overstate ISO by about 1/3 to 1/2 stop.

Play Food - Fujifilm X-T10 with Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 @ f/1.4, 1/180s, ISO 2500
Play Food – Fujifilm X-T10 with Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 @ f/1.4, 1/180s, ISO 2500

As far as detail is concerned, the camera is capable of resolving plenty of detail with good lenses, which thankfully are plentiful in the Fuji X series.  The only times detail suffers if you are using a RAW converter like Lightroom in the rare situations that cause the watercolor effect to show up.  Using a different converter (once they’ve updated) should solve the issue here.  Overall, however, this is really where newer sensors are starting to make the X-Trans sensor look dated.  All the current APS-C competition starts at 24 megapixels, including the newest Canon Digital Rebels.  The Sony a6000, which has already been out for a year, is $200 cheaper and has a 24 megapixel sensor.  Resolution certainly isn’t everything, and 16MP is plenty for most people’s use, but if Fuji wants to stay competitive, it really needs to up the game here before they’re left in the dust.

JPEG Quality

One area where holding the status quo is fine is in the JPEG rendition. Fuji still has some of the best JPEGs in the industry.  X-T10 JPEG output is low in artifacts and has good detail and excellent dynamic range, especially when using more gentle highlight and shadow settings.

Fuji has unique ‘film simulations’ that seek to emulate some of their more popular films, such as Velvia, Provia, Astia and so on. I’ve become a very big fan of the Classic Chrome simulation, especially when shooting portraits or any candid people shots.  It’s not the best for landscape use, but that’s where Provia, Astia and Velvia simulations work best.  There are also black and white color filter simulations and negative film simulations as well.

Fuji is still the only camera company where I will sometimes prefer a JPEG I’ve made in camera to a processed RAW image, and that’s a nice thing to fall back on.  While I still prefer the flexibility and added benefits of shooting RAW, if you are a JPEG shooter, the X-T10, as well as any other Fuji camera, should be on your short list.

Video

As I noted at the beginning of the review, I am not a videographer and don’t feel fully qualified to discuss the ins and outs of video shooting and video quality.  However, I did test the video mode, and it’s nice to see Fuji making some strides over the years, though strict videographers will still probably want to look elsewhere for a primary camera.  The X-T10 is capable of shooting in 1080p or 720p at 24,30 and 60 fps.  It also allows for manual control over shutter speed and aperture that can be changed on the fly: something that the X-T1 could not do upon release (though the same video features of the X-T10 are now added to the X-T1 via firmware update).  The new Auto ISO capabilities with exposure compensation also translate to the video side, where it’s very useful.  This too can be adjusted on the fly.  Continuous autofocus works fairly well, with smoother and slower transitions, but the in-and-out nature of focus confirmation can still be seen from time to time.

Quality of the video itself is merely acceptable.  In good light, I find it looks just fine, and rolling shutter is actually quite minimal.  However, at higher ISOs, there are quite a lot of artifacts in the final video, and detail and fidelity suffer.

Continue: Conclusion and Image Samples

Tags:

Comments

33 responses to “Review: Fujifilm X-T10”

  1. Red Slater Avatar
    Red Slater

    Excellent review. For us jpeger street shooters, this is the best camera out there. One thing, though. The Q-menu is customizable – you said it isn’t. And for for larger lenses, just attach the handgrip.

  2. Brian Caslis Avatar
    Brian Caslis

    I think the section about the Q menu is wrong. I can customize the Q menu on my X-T10 just like the X-T1 by holding down the Q button for a few seconds. Also the EVF can be set to auto brightness making darker indoors and brighter outdoors. I find it works very well.

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      Thanks. I looked all over and couldn’t find it like I could on the X-T1. I’ve updated the review.

  3. […] Admiringlight simply revealed its Fujifilm X-T10 evaluation. Here an excerpt from the conclusions: […]

  4. Daniel Avatar
    Daniel

    I guess I’m in the minority but I don’t get the appeal of Fuji images. It’s a beautiful looking camera and I love the lenses, but image quality lacks something to my eye.

    1. Chris Avatar
      Chris

      Daniel, I think what you’re noticing is that there’s sometimes a little less microcontrast in Fuji images. It’s a subtle thing, but I think it’s a reasonably fair generalization for some types of images. It depends on what style you’re going for. I think it works well for fashion in particular.

      1. Mk82 Avatar
        Mk82

        You do know that “Microcontrast” means exactly same thing as Contrast + Sharpness?

        If either one is lacking, you don’t get the results people mumble as “Microcontrast”.

        1. Rantanplan Avatar
          Rantanplan

          I’m not so sure, if it really is the same, or maybe it is not microontrast that’s missing.

          What I would say is:

          Sharpness, color, bokeh, of Fuji Lenses is really great (in the extreme corners not always, though).

          I think it all boils down to the X-Trans subpixel color pattern on the sensor (look at comparisons of X-A1 vs X-M1, etc.)

          The pros are: smooth gradiation of colors (lacking in high-freq. color, though. Good on low ISO, probably coz of the bigger rendering kernel of, smoothing out things. Still good (perhaps to good to be true) sharpness on “detected” high frequency stuff.

          And what some refer to the more “film-look” it does not accentuate edges to that level other digital cameras still do. That for me is the main thing to like about the images it produces.

          But one of the cons is that micro-contrast is missing in details that are not on full contrast, this is not much of a problem if you use VSCO and other filters that produce that trendy “matte look” anyways, coz for this type of images it really works perfectly.

          But as test have shown, even smaller MFT sensors, with good glass (Pana/Leica Nocticron) are able to outresolve all the Fufi-X cams when it’s purely about image detail (not pixel quality, per se).

          I have had an X-E1, still have a X100 and X-Pro1, but most probably will be selling the X-Pro1 again.

  5. Jano Avatar
    Jano

    Nice review and it really looks like a great camera for the price. Really hope they update the X-E2 to receive the major ones of these new features (better AF sensitivity, electronic shutter, EC in manual mode, direct AF point selection mainly). If not they really need to reduce the price of the X-E2…

    As far as I know the X100T was the first Fuji camera to be able to use EC in manual mode though. Pretty sad it took them so long

    Oh, and I think there shouldn’t be any Fuji review without a rant about waxy JPEG skin at high ISO and them not letting us turn it off.

  6. DJ Avatar
    DJ

    If you haven’t tried it already, you can change the EXIF data on the X-T10 files to “X-T1″ and open them in Photo Ninja perfectly. I use EXIFTools. The code to do it is -exif:Model=”X-T1”. My workflow is:

    1.) Import photos to Lightroom CC. Sort images, ratings, create collections etc. Basic adjustments, crops.
    2.) If I need the extra detail Photo Ninja provides, I will change the exif as described above.
    3.) PN is set up as plug-in to Lightroom. “Edit in” in PN, develop raw file save down to TIF.
    4.) Apply adjustments to TIF in Lightroom (local adjustments, crops, presets, etc.)
    5.) If the TIF doesn’t look quite right, go back to PN and repeat step 3.
    6.) When I’m happy with the TIF file as seen in Lightroom, go back into EXIFTools and reset the model to X-T10.

    Sounds complicated, but really not. Works great for now, until PictureCode updates PN to support X-T10 officially.

    X-T10 has been a great camera for the few weeks I’ve owned it. Took it to Ireland the day after I took delivery from Amazon…great for street, long exposure and landscapes in such a compact form factor. Lovin’ it so far.

    1. Roger Whitehead Avatar
      Roger Whitehead

      This trick also works for Lightroom and Capture One, probably other Raw processors too.

      Not being a fan of hand-to-hand combat with command-line interfaces, I use ExifToolGUI to manage Exiftool. It’s free.

      Roger

      1. DJ Avatar
        DJ

        Good tip on the GUI Roger. Thanks.

  7. ajurjans Avatar

    “Fuji is still the only camera company where I will sometimes prefer a JPEG I’ve made in camera to a processed RAW image, and that’s a nice thing to fall back on. While I still prefer the flexibility and added benefits of shooting RAW, if you are a JPEG shooter, the X-T10, as well as any other Fuji camera, should be on your short list.”

    Oh, yes! I am shooting with an X-E1 and I have NEVER ever previosuly been able to… set the camera to jpeg and not worry about the outcome. And that is after some notable experience with Canons, Nikons and latest Sony cameras. This is the FIRST system where the jpegs are as good as you can get.

    1. Mk82 Avatar
      Mk82

      Olympus even beats Fuji in that but is just amazing how there really are only two manufacturers, Fuji and Olympus that manages to make great usable JPEG out of the camera without requiring to go through image editing with RAW.

      Looking Canon, Nikon, Sony etc. It is just amazing how users of those branded cameras bash JPEG only because their cameras are incapable to compress RAW in camera with high quality and great colors.

      And when the JPEG from these cameras is like 99% of the time correctly what you need and want, you don’t need RAW in a same manner as those others.

  8. […] Sourced through Scoop.it from: admiringlight.com […]

  9. tobias Avatar
    tobias

    Great review. I’ll hopefully pick one of these up in the next couple of months. What leather strap is that? It looks great on the X-t10

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      It’s from Gordy’s Camera Straps. http://gordyscamerastraps.com

      I’ve had this one for two years now and it still looks brand new. They take about a month to really break in, and then the leather becomes very supple. I have another one with orange wrap cord for my A7II. I use the black/gray on my Fuji bodies. You’ll see the orange one if you come back either tomorrow or Thursday: my review of the Sony 90 Macro will hit then, and I have a shot showing that wrist strap. They make neck straps too, but I’ve always preferred wrist straps for my mirrorless cameras.

      1. tobias Avatar
        tobias

        Awesome thanks Jordan! I’ll look into your other review now. What size strap did you go for? Regular? Thanks again

        1. Jordan Steele Avatar

          I have the regular on my Fuji and the long on my Sony. The regular fits, but is just a bit tight if I sweat at all. Makes it hard to get off (it’s fine during shooting). The long fits me better. However, I’m a big guy.

  10. Andrius Avatar
    Andrius

    What camera system or camera itself is your favorite, what do you use most from equipment that you have ?

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      Now, that’s a loaded question! I have at least a small kit from all the systems that I regularly review: Micro 4/3, Fuji X, Sony E mount (both APS-C and full-frame). Most of my gear right now is in the Fuji system, and I use that for most of my family shooting as well as general all-around stuff. In that situation, it’s the X-T1 about 90% of the time, though I have an X-E2 as well that gets some use.

      The Sony A7 II also gets quite a lot of use. This year, the A7 II has gotten a real workout because of the amount of stuff that’s come out for FF Sony in the past year, while Micro 4/3 and Fuji are nearing complete systems and have slower release cycles at the moment. However, I grab my A7 II the most when I’m going out specifically for landscape work.

      My Micro 4/3 kit (OM-D E-M5) generally only gets used personally for macro work (I LOVE the Olympus 60mm macro) and for times I want a long lens with minimal bulk: so the Olympus 75-300 does a great job there.

      So, to sum up: the Fuji X-T1 and Sony A7 II get about 95% of my personal shots. Probably leaned a bit more towards the Fuji, but pretty close.

  11. Jeff Avatar

    Jordan,

    I have been getting this and a couple of your other posts over and over for days now. Any chance you can stop it please?

    Cheers,

    Jeff

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      I’m not quite sure what you mean. Can you describe what’s going on for you? I’m not sure I understand, and I’m not actively promoting anything at the moment through any outlet.

      1. Jeff Avatar

        I subscribe to your blog with NetNewsWire. This post keeps on showing up every time that a refresh happens. I mark it as read and it should not show up again, but it does.

        I have over a hundred subscriptions and yours are the only ones that this is haoppening to. It has only jsut started happening.

        Cheers,

        Jeff

        1. Jordan Steele Avatar

          Thanks. I’ll look into it.

  12. Dave Thornton Avatar
    Dave Thornton

    I know this is probably a bit late but what an excellent review of this camera! having had Nikon gear for years but finding it too heavy for my increasingly arthritic joints, I sold it all and bought into the Panasonic m4/3 system but never really gelled with it. I looked at the XT10 when it first came out, handled one in a shop, read your review and was sold! It (to me, anyway) is a brilliant piece of kit and I’m trying to avoid having a “GAS” attack until I am fully conversant with the camera. Excellent website by the way. Keep up the good work!

    Dave Thornton

  13. […] a minor update to the low-end X-A series, with the X-A2.  The second was the outstanding mid-range X-T10, a camera that has the majority of the features of the flagship X-T1 at a much more modest price. […]

  14. […] X-T10 (review here) is the X-T1’s little brother.  When it debuted, it supplanted the X-E2 as the second fiddle […]

  15. TOM BELL Avatar

    I was interested in your use of Olympus only with long lenses. I must say I have an XA1 with 18-55/18/27 lenses and am missing a camera with a viewfinder ….
    But the other thing about m43 is the GM5 with the little 12-32 / 15 prime …. It is so tiny a genuine tiny street camera jewel.

    But I am happy with 16mp and impressed that the 16 mp holds up SO well against the new 24mp cameras. Waiting for price fall but I am still weighing up the compactness of this little beauty with the water protection of the XT1 given that I live on rainy Dartmoor in England !!

    Thanks for such a thorough photographers review. Brilliant

  16. Cedric Avatar

    Hello Jordan
    I have a little question about this XT10 with the XF 60mm f2.4
    I know this lens is well known for it’s laggy AF, but I was wondering if using this lens with the XT10 would make things better (as it does with the 35mm f1.4) ?
    Any information about this ?

    Thank you in advance !

  17. […] dem Markt gehört. Und nun hat Fotograf Jordan Steele in seinem ausführlichen Test der X-T10 auf admiringlight.com auch einige Aspekte der X-T10 mit denen der A6000 […]

  18. […] late) X-T2 review comes the review of its little brother, the X-T20. The X-T20 is the successor to Fuji’s X-T10, which was released almost two years ago.  The X-T10 proved to be a very capable body with nearly […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search


Categories


Recent Posts


  1. Great review. I had one as well and moved up to an XSI. Very underrated sensors as I think both…

  2. I think it is near Hillsboro.

  3. This article got me thinking… Why does Canon make RF S lenses starting with 18mm when most full frame RF…